347
347
Dec 14, 2012
12/12
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 347
favorite 0
quote 0
i know that's true in ohio and michigan, states like that. we have another person here, collin, thank you for joining us. you were at virginia tech, you were a survivor down there and i'm glad you were. here you are. a lot of people in the gun ownership side, the second amendment people, the zealots, say if a bunch of people have guns they could shoot this guy down when he walked in the door. i can imagine what we will hear in the days ahead. if some of the school officials had been armed, they could have stopped him before he got to the kids. your thoughts. >> you will be hearing it but i don't quite understand it. we are the most armed country in the modern world, and we have the most problems with gun violence. you know, i mean, if more guns solved our problems, then we'd be the safest country already. that's not it. you know, the conversation that we're having now, the conversation that the vast majority of americans are having is the reasonable middle ground. is the background checks on all gun sales. that's something gun owners and nra
i know that's true in ohio and michigan, states like that. we have another person here, collin, thank you for joining us. you were at virginia tech, you were a survivor down there and i'm glad you were. here you are. a lot of people in the gun ownership side, the second amendment people, the zealots, say if a bunch of people have guns they could shoot this guy down when he walked in the door. i can imagine what we will hear in the days ahead. if some of the school officials had been armed, they...
216
216
Dec 31, 2012
12/12
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 216
favorite 0
quote 0
as a matter of fact, one key chairman in the how many times, mike rogers, he's from michigan, he's chairman of the house intelligence committee, doesn't have direct stake in this but he did emerge from a meeting in the speaker's office and told our frank thorpe that he thinks what he's been hearing, at least without that sequestration or a delay in the sequestration, could not pass the house of representatives. so there's always that problem as well. it's been thought all along by some people that going over the cliff would make it easier for something to pass the house of representatives. you know the logic there. they'd be voting to cut taxes as opposed to allowing them to rise on the top 1% or 2%, something that's anathema to the core of the republican party. there are theories put forward by many democrats that john boehner would not put any type of tax vote that would inflame his cause cuss, inflame conservatives around the country until after that gavel is safely in his hands when the new congress is sworn in on january 3rd. so things are still very much up in the air. we do know they
as a matter of fact, one key chairman in the how many times, mike rogers, he's from michigan, he's chairman of the house intelligence committee, doesn't have direct stake in this but he did emerge from a meeting in the speaker's office and told our frank thorpe that he thinks what he's been hearing, at least without that sequestration or a delay in the sequestration, could not pass the house of representatives. so there's always that problem as well. it's been thought all along by some people...
128
128
Dec 8, 2012
12/12
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 128
favorite 0
quote 0
so we get a chunk anyway if we lose the cities. >> like michigan, pennsylvania, new york -- at least where you have a large big city and minorities, they like to cut them off. >> the thing is, there are no rules in the constitution about picking electors to the electoral college. every state gets to -- >> why do they -- >> it became the consensus position over time. that winner takes all. if you wanted to do the system, could you make the argument that you should drop off electoral votes by population in every state. that would be fair if you did that in every state, in which case it would reflect the popular vote. but that's not what they are doing here and they tried to do this before this election and even a more weighted way. if you win the congressional district, you get the electoral from that district and under that situation, obama winning pennsylvania would have gotten seven out of the 20 electoral votes. >> ron, if you're in a minority community, it seems that you want it the way it is now because leverage in from michigan to detroit, for example. or chicago. if it was just
so we get a chunk anyway if we lose the cities. >> like michigan, pennsylvania, new york -- at least where you have a large big city and minorities, they like to cut them off. >> the thing is, there are no rules in the constitution about picking electors to the electoral college. every state gets to -- >> why do they -- >> it became the consensus position over time. that winner takes all. if you wanted to do the system, could you make the argument that you should drop...
160
160
Dec 8, 2012
12/12
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 160
favorite 0
quote 0
you want michigan from detroit or in philadelphia, its influence op the statewide election. if it was just every person and you didn't give that block vote power to people, they would permanently be in the minority and permanently out of power because you could go out and look around for other votes. >> that's right. forget about apportioning electoral votes. what if we went to a national popular vote. that would be the last thing republicans would want. they would never win the white house. they seem to think that people in the cities are some strange alien. they are not really americans. the only votes that count are in the bergs. >> hamlets. >> most americans live in cities. >> that's exactly what paul ryan said. we would have done well if it wasn't for the urban vote. which is most people. >> here's the rational for the moment. "anyone who voted for governor romney does not have any reflection of that vote in the electoral college vote. this is a proposal that's not party specific or partisan in any way. but just an attempt to have the popular vote reflected in the elect
you want michigan from detroit or in philadelphia, its influence op the statewide election. if it was just every person and you didn't give that block vote power to people, they would permanently be in the minority and permanently out of power because you could go out and look around for other votes. >> that's right. forget about apportioning electoral votes. what if we went to a national popular vote. that would be the last thing republicans would want. they would never win the white...
182
182
Dec 14, 2012
12/12
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 182
favorite 0
quote 0
win, and i think if he had run this time, he had -- he could have got all those blue collar guys in michigan, all the blue collar guys in ohio, all the blue collar guys in wisconsin. he's a blue collar guy, and he would have won the south anyway. he would have been a great candidate. the question is is -- >> when did you start saying this? >> i said it on your show. the question is in four years can he maintain that. >> let's not talk about four years. let's talk about right now. don't do that. don't do what you just said. this is what it looks like right now. >> right now he would be a great candidate. >> shrummy, let's talk about culture. you're a student of popular culture. something says to me it's jersey's turn. it just is. if you don't buy it, say you don't buy that. >> i don't buy that. i think this guy is really interesting. he's a big winner in 2012 -- >> would you ever back a republican under any circumstance over any democrat ever? >> it depends who the democrat was -- >> have you ever done it? >> as a general proposition, no. >> have you ever done it? >> no. >> then make that cle
win, and i think if he had run this time, he had -- he could have got all those blue collar guys in michigan, all the blue collar guys in ohio, all the blue collar guys in wisconsin. he's a blue collar guy, and he would have won the south anyway. he would have been a great candidate. the question is is -- >> when did you start saying this? >> i said it on your show. the question is in four years can he maintain that. >> let's not talk about four years. let's talk about right...